seadoo2006: 1) Yep ... most common form of penile injury after fracture is gunshot amputation ... remember that the next time you holster up. Don't believe me or the link? Talk to some urologists or ER nurses (like my SO is). More common than you'd think.http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-penile-amputation.htm
Dimensio: I have no difficulty carrying a double-stacked .45 caliber handgun. However, because I carry it in a fanny pack I must acknowledge that I appear to be a "pussy" in doing so.
BraveNewCheneyWorld: udhq: BraveNewCheneyWorld: The idea that nothing is perfect isn't a valid reason to dismiss the findings.Wait, so being independent but producing results that contradict your preconceived worldview were enough to dismiss my earlier link, but INACCURACY is no reason to question yours?I was asked a specific leading question. I chose to answer that no study will ever be "perfect". Your study on the other hand was from a group that is specifically anti gun. Of course you cannot trust them to be independent as their income stream relies on making guns look bad, or at best, ineffective.Mock26: I did not dismiss the findings. I am merely questioning the accuracy of them. There is a huge difference between the two. Nor do I blindly question them. I presented some reasons as to why his numbers are open to debate. You, however, presented no counter point as to why one would take them at face value as being absolultely 100% accurate, especially given the huge variance in numbers between various surveys and statistics reported over the years, and even especially more so because Kleck's own study gives a range from 1 million to 2.5 million! Also, you forgot to answer my questions. Maybe you missed them. If so, here they are again: Do you believe that they are 100% accurate? Do you blindly accept Kleck's number of 2.5 million even when his survey produced a range of 1.5 million and they did not release the full results of their survey or their weighting methodology?Yes, you are dismissing it. Saying that 80,000 is closer to the mark, when refuting a claim of 2.5 or even 1 million, is nothing short of dismissal. Also, the onus is not on me to prove that the numbers are accurate, it is on you to disprove them. Your attempt at disproving them isn't even evidence, you just spout off about a bunch of theoreticals of why it might not be accurate, but have no proof that your claims are based in reality. Do I think it's 100% accurate? As I stated, no study will be perfect so that is my answer. I believe it's safe to say that the number is in the 1.5 million range, and that 80,000 number is produced by people looking to eliminate any samples that are not just of reasonable doubt, but of any doubt, which is an asinine way to handle data of this nature.
Mock26: By the way, since you yourself dismiss the 2.5 million claim the onus is also on you to disprove that number to be incorrect. That is, after all, the official number given in the report. 2,500,000. So, would you care to disprove the 2.5 million claim? Or are you the only one allowed to believe the numbers to be inaccurate?
udhq: mizchief: "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas JeffersonYou're aware that's not a real quote, right?
Schroedinger's Glory Hole: ZzeusS: "If you've ever traveled outside the state of Illinois, you've been in a state that has concealed carry and you probably didn't even notice," said Rep. Michael Unes, R-East Peoria. "But the people who do notice are the criminals."I just love this quote.Suck it liberal bed wetters.And here is your fundamental flaw. There is no group called "the criminals." Criminal acts are carried out by any person sufficiently compromised and will use what is available to them at the time. Less guns available, less crimes carried out with them. This will not stop Sandy Hooks, this will not stop any specific shooting, but it will reduce the overall available potential for criminal acts to be carried out with simple deadly force, as well as reduce the number of suicides. Belief in the existence of, and fearing "the criminals" is a lot closer to being a bed wetter.
BraveNewCheneyWorld: Mock26: By the way, since you yourself dismiss the 2.5 million claim the onus is also on you to disprove that number to be incorrect. That is, after all, the official number given in the report. 2,500,000. So, would you care to disprove the 2.5 million claim? Or are you the only one allowed to believe the numbers to be inaccurate?No asshole, I didn't dismiss the 2.5 million claim, I only said that a number of at least 1.5 million is a SAFE estimate. This isn't a difficult concept, and I really shouldn't have to explain it to you. But since you're proving yourself to be stunningly dimwitted, I will. Imagine a car manufacturer states that their car goes 150mph. Is it safe to say that a particular car you buy off the lot will hit 150? No, it won't because there will be minor variances in manufacture and testing conditions. Now, If I claim that the car does 135, that would be safe to say, because it would cover the majority of variables that negatively impact the test. Does it mean the 150 result is a lie? No, it just means that 135 is guaranteed to be the minimum result upon additional outside testing. 2.5 million vs 80,000 isn't even in the same league. 2.5 vs 1.5 is.
Carousel Beast: aNihilV10L8tr: Because as we all know, is the only thing that couldve saved those people in Boston from bad guys with pressure cookers are good guys with pressure cookers.It certainly took guys with guns to stop them once they were found, didn't it?
udhq: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.Yes, except, a.) the D.o.I. was written several years prior to the constitution that established the US as a democratic republic, and b.) it has roughly the same standing in American law as the last Harry Potter novel.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jan 23 2017 14:35:11
Runtime: 0.510 sec (509 ms)